Publication

The Aim of a Theory of Justice

Boot, M., 2012, In : Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 15, p. 7-21 DOI 10.1007/s10677-011-9308-5.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

APA

Boot, M. (2012). The Aim of a Theory of Justice. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 15, 7-21. [DOI 10.1007/s10677-011-9308-5].

Author

Boot, Martijn. / The Aim of a Theory of Justice. In: Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2012 ; Vol. 15. pp. 7-21.

Harvard

Boot, M 2012, 'The Aim of a Theory of Justice', Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, vol. 15, DOI 10.1007/s10677-011-9308-5, pp. 7-21.

Standard

The Aim of a Theory of Justice. / Boot, Martijn.

In: Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, Vol. 15, DOI 10.1007/s10677-011-9308-5, 2012, p. 7-21.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Vancouver

Boot M. The Aim of a Theory of Justice. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2012;15:7-21. DOI 10.1007/s10677-011-9308-5.


BibTeX

@article{9a3cc104a8674788b60633edb5f96c73,
title = "The Aim of a Theory of Justice",
abstract = "Amartya Sen argues that for the advancement of justice identification of {\textquoteleft}perfect{\textquoteright}justice is neither necessary nor sufficient. He replaces {\textquoteleft}perfect{\textquoteright} justice with comparative justice. Comparative justice limits itself to comparing social states with respect to degrees of justice. Sen{\textquoteright}s central thesis is that identifying {\textquoteleft}perfect{\textquoteright} justice and comparing imperfect social states are {\textquoteleft}analytically disjoined{\textquoteright}. This essay refutes Sen{\textquoteright}s thesis by demonstrating that to be able to make adequate comparisons we need to identify and integrate criteria of comparison. This is precisely the aim of a theory of justice (such as John Rawls{\textquoteright}s theory): identifying, integrating and ordering relevant principles of justice. The same integrated criteria that determine {\textquoteleft}perfect{\textquoteright} justice are needed to be able to adequately compare imperfect social states. Sen{\textquoteright}s alternative approach, which is based on social choice theory, is incapable of avoiding contrary, indeterminate or incoherent directives where plural principles of justice conflict.",
keywords = "Theory of justice . Social choice theory . Comparative justice . Incomplete ordering . Impossibility theorem . Ideal theory . John Rawls . Amartya Sen",
author = "Martijn Boot",
year = "2012",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "7--21",
journal = "Ethical Theory and Moral Practice",
issn = "1386-2820",
publisher = "SPRINGER",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Aim of a Theory of Justice

AU - Boot, Martijn

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Amartya Sen argues that for the advancement of justice identification of ‘perfect’justice is neither necessary nor sufficient. He replaces ‘perfect’ justice with comparative justice. Comparative justice limits itself to comparing social states with respect to degrees of justice. Sen’s central thesis is that identifying ‘perfect’ justice and comparing imperfect social states are ‘analytically disjoined’. This essay refutes Sen’s thesis by demonstrating that to be able to make adequate comparisons we need to identify and integrate criteria of comparison. This is precisely the aim of a theory of justice (such as John Rawls’s theory): identifying, integrating and ordering relevant principles of justice. The same integrated criteria that determine ‘perfect’ justice are needed to be able to adequately compare imperfect social states. Sen’s alternative approach, which is based on social choice theory, is incapable of avoiding contrary, indeterminate or incoherent directives where plural principles of justice conflict.

AB - Amartya Sen argues that for the advancement of justice identification of ‘perfect’justice is neither necessary nor sufficient. He replaces ‘perfect’ justice with comparative justice. Comparative justice limits itself to comparing social states with respect to degrees of justice. Sen’s central thesis is that identifying ‘perfect’ justice and comparing imperfect social states are ‘analytically disjoined’. This essay refutes Sen’s thesis by demonstrating that to be able to make adequate comparisons we need to identify and integrate criteria of comparison. This is precisely the aim of a theory of justice (such as John Rawls’s theory): identifying, integrating and ordering relevant principles of justice. The same integrated criteria that determine ‘perfect’ justice are needed to be able to adequately compare imperfect social states. Sen’s alternative approach, which is based on social choice theory, is incapable of avoiding contrary, indeterminate or incoherent directives where plural principles of justice conflict.

KW - Theory of justice . Social choice theory . Comparative justice . Incomplete ordering . Impossibility theorem . Ideal theory . John Rawls . Amartya Sen

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 7

EP - 21

JO - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

JF - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

SN - 1386-2820

M1 - DOI 10.1007/s10677-011-9308-5

ER -

ID: 55775278